"2nd Btn KGL Light Infantry trousers in Spain?" Topic

I have one picture showing these guys wearing white trousers in 1811 (Osprey) but all my other sources show them in grey trousers (though these are mainly for 1815).

So, which is it?

Thanks, in advance, for your help.

James

As a general rule white trousers for the Peninsula and grey trousers for Waterloo.

You can vary that a little bit using the campaign look, patches, brown trousers etc.

Up until 1811 regulations called for white breeches with knee length black gaiters. Use of trousers or overalls was a matter of expediency in the field; white probably predominated in the Iberian Peninsula, but some use of local brown cloth likely occurred. The wearing of gray trousers with short gaiters as a matter of regulation came in about the same time as the Belgic shako. It's a matter of dispute as to just when the new items would have reached the field army in the Iberian Peninsula. Some maintain that existing stocks of the older patterns continued to be issued through 1814.

Yes, but the real tragedy is the idea that Baring's lads in LHS by 1815 almost surely were wearing the "Belgic shako", as that much later on and after a period of peace.

As indeed was probably worn by the 95th in the sandpit and with Adam's Brigade.

As for the 52nd…makes you weep. I will stick with stovepipe for all……

Yes, yes, decades of orthodoxy up in smoke! But history was what is was--whatever that may have been. Sorry about that.

is there only wild speculation? There should be more information – in the books like Schwertfeger or Brandis about the KGL

If you are talking to he green jacketed light infantry KGL? You could virtually do whatever you like. The light battalions were renowned for using none regulation cloth to replaced worn out items. In 1812 though the regulation for winter was grey but that didn't start happening to all units until later due to supplies.

So it depends if you want a realistic look or parade ground look.

Yep, green jackets. 2nd Light Infantry Battalion KGL.

It would be all too easy to confuse the Light Company of the 2nd Line Battn KGL…a redcoated unit that did contribute to the defence of LHS and may have even used the Baker rifle, with the 2nd KGL Light Infantry Battn (green coats) that made up the bulk of the defence (adding in some 1st Light and Nassau and even the odd Hanoverian?)

The names are very similar……

The two appear here in LHS of course, not Espana!

I just need a 'tiny' unit (x6 Warlord figs, purchased a couple of weeks ago) to represent the company (rifles?) attached to Lowes Brigade (KGL BRIGADE) of 1st Division.

I think I'll go for a mix.

Thanks

Hate to say this and I may well be referring to a different time, but my reading suggests Low's Brigade variously consisted of 1st, 2nd and 5th Line battalions KGL or 5th and 7th Line.(redcoats and would have included Light Companies in each, red with shoulder wings etc) Did not include 1st and 2nd battalion KGL Light Infantry (green coats)…………

I do hope to be contradicted, genuinely! Let us hope there was an attached company in green from either of the Light Battalions

Discussed here, but suggests Light companies from 5th and 7th Line KGL

link

Hi Deadhead,

According to my OOBs (Oman and Osprey) at Fuentes de Onoro the KGL Brigade comprising 1st, 2nd, 5th, 7th battalions had 2 companies of light infantry attached, in a similar way to rifle companies (of the 95th, 60th or B. Oels) in other brigades. Osprey further describes them as companies from 2nd Btn. KGL light infantry.

Hence, just six figures – my battalions are in 24s.

Then you have it right and well done. My references were Talavera and…..also somewhere else…..hence 1,2 5 or 5,7!

Very specific then that the two cos were Light Flank companies from line and Light Battn cos went to another Brigade.

Actually delighted to be proved wrong and well done for checking it out properly. The confusion of a Centre Co of a Light Battn and Light Co of a Line Battn is all too common.

Just an FYI … when painting my British units for Spain , I mix and match the trousers. Grey, brown and off white, dirty tan. It gives the unit a campaign look which I think is more of what the actual army was like after months of campaign and supply issues. They may have come off the boat sharp but that didn't last long.

Very good point. Never actually tried but I would imagine, bleached colours, much dry brushing of the figure with a light sand, growth of beard, patching of knees would also help.

I love to see the folk who take the trouble to do the bases as Iberian ground, too. Lots of grass and trampled wheat/mud is fine for me and 1815, but I have seen many fine examples that capture the rocks, the sandy dry ground, the scrub of Spain. Any other suggestions based on experience rather than my guesses?

@olicana,

In view of what you said about these companies of the 2nd KGL Light Battalion being attached to a brigade of KGL line battalions, I strongly suspect that they would have been rifle companies. My reasoning being that the other companies that you mentioned from the 5/60th and Brunswick Oels Corps were all riflemen.

As I understand it, when the two KGL light battalions were formed, they were armed mostly with muskets, but probably each had two rifle companies. As time went on, the proportion of rifles increased to the point where the majority of the 2nd Light Battalion were armed with rifles, and the 1st Light were entirely equipped with rifles (at Waterloo--there are records of the arms turned in when the battalions subsequently disbanded).

I think you are right. I bought a pack of mixed rifles and muskets (from Warlord). They'll serve for purposes and I'll probably class them as wholly rifles, though I have no info on which companies (flank /centre ?) they were actually from.

Brandis who served in the 2nd battalion light infantry KGL describes their trousers as middle grey compared to the dark grey ones of 1st battalion light infantry, those armed with a musket did wear cross belts as for the line infantry, in 1808 about 1/3rd of the battalion had rifles – those armed with rifles, when dropped out, the battalion retained the rifle and so gradually the number of rifles increased.

This I pasted and copied from a reply of Michael Tänzer – a very knowledgable person about the KGL

"Page 8 is the "Return of Arms of the 2nd Light Battn. Kings German Legion at Steierberg the 5th February 1816" written in English and signed "Geo Baring, Lt Colonel". The return is in the form of a table with the columns "Rifles" and "Musquets" and the following information:
"In possession with the Battn. [last 4 words underlined]
belonging Originally to the Battn. | 228 | 67
received from the 3rd Line Battn. | | 26
received from the 5th Line Battn. | | 4
Total | 228 | 97
In Store at Ostend [last 3 words underlined]
belonging Orginally to the Battn. | | 85
received from the 3rd Line Battn. | | 28
received from the 5th Line Battn. | | 24
Total | | 137
In possession of Men Sick absent and on Command | 12 | 14
Gran Total | 240 | 248
Recapitulation [underlined]
belonging Originally to the Battn. | 240 | 166
1st Decbr 1815 received from the 3rd Line Battn. | | 54
2nd Do. 1815 received from the 5th Line Battn. | | 28
Total | 240 | 248"
HStA Hann. 38 D, Nr. 179, Pag. 3 is a report from the 1st Light Battalion KGL in German, dated 14 February 1816. It gives the result of a committe meeting inspecting all firearms returned from the companies and is signed by the president of the committe Captain Schaedtler. The report lists 300 rifles ["Büchsen mit Hirschfänger"] as serviceable, 20 rifles needing repairs and 25 rifles unserviceable; no muskets are mentioned.
HStA Hann. 38 D, Nr. 180 has also reports from the line battalions of the KGL in English:
Pag. 11: 1st Line Battalion, 1 February 1816, 65 rifles, 469 muskets
Pag. 16: 2nd Line Battalion, 13 February 1816, 84 rifles, 401 muskets
The report of the 5th Line Battalion is in German and signed on 27 January 1816 by Captain Georg Nölting of Wheatley fame:
Pag. 25: 49 rifles ["Büchsen"], 234 muskets ["Gewehre" !!!]
Pag. 28 is a report on the accoutrements in possession of the 5th Line Battalion and signed on 9 February 1816 by Lt.-Col. von Linsingen. The table is divided in several main columns: "Serjeanten", "Tambourn", "Pioniers", "Schützen" [riflemen], "Soldaten". The undercolumns under "Schützen" give "Koppel" [waistbelts] and "Pulverhörner" [powderhorns] for 50 men, clearly indicating that these were really riflemen.
All these numbers, compared with the strength of the battalions at Waterloo, clearly show that the light companies of the line battalions were riflemen, at least at Waterloo. A large proportion of the 2nd Light Battalion men was armed with muskets, whereas the men of the 1st Light Battalion seem to have been all riflemen.
The 1813 drill instructions were not used by KGL light infantry but written by KGL officers for the use of the newly formed Hannoverian Levies, the later field battalions, because of the lack of any standardised drill instructions in 1813. The title is misleading! In the HStA are many propositions for altering the pre 1803 Hannoverian drill to fit into the British drill system. Unfortunately the end product, of which some handwritten adjutant's versions may be found in the HStA, was never printed. The 1802 Hannoverian drill had a large part on the exercises of the sharpshooters which was incorporated in the KGL drill. The new Hannoverian formations of 1813, however, had no use for this. The weapons for them were sent from England and in HStA Hann. 38 D, Nr. 182, Pag. 8 is an "Account of Small Arms and Accoutrements received and issued by Dpy. Asst. Commissy. Taylor in and for the Service of Hanover" dated 8 October 1814 and countersigned by Lt.-Gen. Baron Decken. All weapons received from 6 September 1813 until 23 July 1814 were "Muskets with Bayonets". These were distributed to the Hannoverian battalions including the Lüneburg FB! Memoirs of officers from the so called light battalions never mention rifles but always bayonets, not "Hirschfänger".
All battalions of the Hannoverian Army were re-equipped (partly changing their uniforms) before the Waterloo campaign. It is possible that their sharpshooters received rifles at that point. According to the memoirs of Lieutenant and Adjutant Carl von Berckefeldt, Landwehrbataillon Münden, his battalion used the pre 1803 Hannoverian regulations and so had sharpshooters, but all men were equipped with the British musket. The "sharpshooters" of the Hannoverian units at Waterloo seem to have been the equivalent of the British light companies. The only exception was the Jäger Corps, which of course was armed with (hunting) rifles.
Part of this research is new and could not be used for my book (see above), where I counted 72 men from the 1st Light and 60 men from the Light Company of the 5th Line Battalion as armed with muskets at La Haye Sainte. This does not alter my arguments, however, as still 60% of the men within LHS were armed with muskets, so that lack of rifle ammunition could not have been that problematic!
"

As for field dress in Spain, I would add some brown trousers but would avaoid white, the light battalions would have tried to get dark colours to remain sort of harder to spot when skirmishing

@ von Winterfeldt,

Thanks, very excellent information! I've seen the part about the arms possessed by the two KGL light battalions in early 1816 elsewhere, but the data on the number of rifles in the KGL line battalions and the information on the Hanoverian Army is new to me.